"The Washington Post concedes that 'numerous' deaths might have been prevented by DDT.
Let's stop here. Any curious reader would ask, Just how 'numerous' is numerous? Wouldn't you ask that question? The Post never asks that question. Why?
Because the answer devastates Rachel Carson and her followers. According to these CDC figures, malaria kills more than 800,000 children under age five every year.
Every year, 800,000 small children die from malaria, a disease once nearly eradicated. Ponder that."
Yeah, the green activists screwed the pooch on this one. It turns out that DDT is an extemely safe insecticide -- its only harmful to a few species of bird and is extremely safe for humans (safe enough to spray on the inside of our homes). So the downside to the mass use of DDT is some birds dying. The upside was the almost eradication of malaria. So what did the greenies make us do ... that's right we banned the stuff, and much of the rest of the world blindly followed suit. Disgusting.
I feel like the same thing is happening again with global warming -- the same forces are at work: mass fear based on shoddy science being pushed on the public by powerful special interest groups aided and abetted by a compliant media and the liberal elites. I foresee the day in 30 years, after we've slowed global economic growth by 1 or 2 percent per year (thus making the whole world substantially poorer, over time) when we ask what the cost was -- in terms of human life*--- of fighting the phantom menace of global warming.
*Because slower economic growth burdens most heavily the very poor, some poor kids won't get adequate medical care or adequate education or even enough food. These are children who would have been able to receive such things had they only been slightly better off: if only their parents could have got a job in that factory that was never built because GDP growth was slightly lower for the past few decades.